WEBVTT
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.440
Welcome back to Day Day Up, the weekly podcast for Chinese professionals navigating the Western workplace.
00:00:05.599 --> 00:00:06.320
I'm Jonathan.
00:00:06.480 --> 00:00:07.679
Let's get into it.
00:00:08.320 --> 00:00:10.960
Cho Ruha with a Chuchang Xiaohuban.
00:00:11.279 --> 00:00:12.800
Can you be more concise?
00:00:13.119 --> 00:00:18.399
If you've heard that at work, it means they've already stopped listening a while ago.
00:00:18.640 --> 00:00:21.280
I've won a national speaking competition twice.
00:00:21.440 --> 00:00:30.000
I've presented to CEOs, negotiated with government regulators, and crafted messaging for hundred million dollar ad campaigns.
00:00:30.160 --> 00:00:32.000
And I've still received that feedback.
00:00:32.159 --> 00:00:33.039
I still do.
00:00:33.280 --> 00:00:48.960
After years of communicating in high-stakes situations and still working on my own conciseness, I've learned what being concise actually means, why it's so difficult, and the two phrases I use to get to the point when I have no time to prepare.
00:00:49.280 --> 00:00:56.799
Cambridge Dictionary defines concise as short and clear, expressing what needs to be said without unnecessary words.
00:00:57.039 --> 00:01:05.680
Read it again because there are two jobs hiding in that sentence, deciding what needs to be said, cutting the unnecessary words.
00:01:06.000 --> 00:01:08.640
Almost everyone jumps straight to the second one.
00:01:08.879 --> 00:01:10.480
It's the visible half.
00:01:10.640 --> 00:01:16.079
You can count words, you can time yourself, you can make that paragraph shorter.
00:01:16.400 --> 00:01:19.920
For us Chinese professionals, that pull is even stronger.
00:01:20.159 --> 00:01:28.640
When you work in your second language, a long block of English is just that much harder for you to make it through compared to your coworker.
00:01:28.879 --> 00:01:31.200
Like reading through my newsletter right now.
00:01:31.439 --> 00:01:38.000
I appreciate you, but cutting words without deciding what needs to be said doesn't make you concise.
00:01:38.480 --> 00:01:40.480
It makes you incomplete.
00:01:41.040 --> 00:01:50.079
In my own writing and speaking, I work in a specific order, decide what needs to be said, and then start cutting around that.
00:01:50.480 --> 00:01:52.079
You've heard the advice.
00:01:52.400 --> 00:01:58.239
Great speaking and writing starts with great thinking, which is true and often utterly useless.
00:01:58.560 --> 00:02:01.760
Because great thinking isn't one thing.
00:02:02.079 --> 00:02:05.920
A scientist reads a businessman's idea and finds it simplistic.
00:02:06.159 --> 00:02:09.759
A businessman reads a scientist's idea and finds it overcomplex.
00:02:10.000 --> 00:02:12.560
Both are thinking well, just for different terrain.
00:02:12.879 --> 00:02:16.159
At work, great thinking doesn't start in your head.
00:02:16.319 --> 00:02:17.759
It starts in theirs.
00:02:18.000 --> 00:02:23.439
Because almost everything we say at work is chasing one of two things, alignment or action.
00:02:23.680 --> 00:02:26.319
Both of them happen inside somebody else's head.
00:02:26.479 --> 00:02:32.879
Which means before you can think about your message, you need to understand three things about the other person.
00:02:33.039 --> 00:02:37.520
What's in it for them, what's the one thing they need to know, and what they need to do.
00:02:37.840 --> 00:02:41.439
Let's take an example from my recent client, Bing.
00:02:41.840 --> 00:02:48.800
Her project was tracking two weeks behind schedule, and she needed to communicate that concisely to her busy manager.
00:02:49.280 --> 00:02:50.560
What's in it for me?
00:02:50.800 --> 00:02:54.159
Bing's manager doesn't really care about the specific reasons.
00:02:54.400 --> 00:02:55.520
Not right now.
00:02:56.159 --> 00:03:01.120
Right now, he cares about a launch date he promised his own boss.
00:03:01.599 --> 00:03:02.960
What's the one thing?
00:03:03.280 --> 00:03:03.919
Naturally.
00:03:04.080 --> 00:03:07.039
The one thing Bing needs to share isn't everything that happened.
00:03:07.199 --> 00:03:09.439
It's that the launch date is now at risk.
00:03:09.680 --> 00:03:14.560
The cause can follow in one short line, but it never goes first.
00:03:15.199 --> 00:03:16.479
What do I need to do?
00:03:16.719 --> 00:03:17.919
Bing's recommendation.
00:03:18.080 --> 00:03:21.199
Keep the date and drop one feature or move the date.
00:03:21.439 --> 00:03:25.439
Together, these three are the first half of the concise formula.
00:03:25.759 --> 00:03:27.280
What needs to be said?
00:03:28.000 --> 00:03:31.199
Now the second half, cutting the unnecessary words.
00:03:31.520 --> 00:03:34.400
If you grew up Chinese, you learned putien.
00:03:34.800 --> 00:03:36.719
Context first, conclusion last.
00:03:36.960 --> 00:03:43.919
So you pile on the context at the beginning, hoping more information will show your thoughtfulness and your rigor.
00:03:44.159 --> 00:03:49.439
In fact, for your audience, it's confusing at best and downright frustrating at worst.
00:03:49.680 --> 00:03:52.400
So I clamp both ends of the message.
00:03:52.719 --> 00:04:01.840
Open with the main thing is close with the reason I'm telling you is try to finish either sentence without having decided something.
00:04:02.080 --> 00:04:02.960
You can't.
00:04:03.120 --> 00:04:05.360
The first one won't let you open with context.
00:04:05.520 --> 00:04:07.759
So it forces your main message to the front.
00:04:07.919 --> 00:04:10.240
The second one won't let you end on information.
00:04:10.400 --> 00:04:12.479
So it forces your ask.
00:04:13.039 --> 00:04:14.719
Here's what it looks like for Bing.
00:04:15.199 --> 00:04:16.079
Before.
00:04:16.399 --> 00:04:24.399
So we had the vendor issue in week two, and then the data migration took longer than expected because the schema didn't match what they gave us.
00:04:24.480 --> 00:04:33.439
And QA found a few things, and I've been working through it with the team, and I think we're mostly okay, but the timeline might move a bit.
00:04:33.680 --> 00:04:34.319
After.
00:04:34.560 --> 00:04:38.399
The main thing is we're two weeks behind and the launch date is at risk.
00:04:38.560 --> 00:04:41.120
The cause was the vendor delay in week two.
00:04:41.279 --> 00:04:48.879
The reason I'm telling you is that I'd like your input on whether we hold the date and cut the reporting feature or move the date.
00:04:49.439 --> 00:04:54.560
I hope that in as few words as possible, I've conveyed my own main message here.
00:04:55.040 --> 00:04:59.839
Conciseness isn't a writing skill, it's a decision-making skill.
00:05:00.079 --> 00:05:03.680
Become more concise, and you'll become so much more.
00:05:04.959 --> 00:05:07.360
Alright, that's your growth tip for this week.
00:05:07.519 --> 00:05:09.439
Now let's take a melon break.
00:05:12.319 --> 00:05:15.920
Sam Altman, you're going to work harder and you're going to love it.
00:05:16.240 --> 00:05:20.959
Sam Altman got on a podcast this week and admitted something refreshingly honest.
00:05:21.279 --> 00:05:24.959
AI is not going to give you a four-day work week.
00:05:25.199 --> 00:05:29.199
Not because the tech can't handle it, but because we won't let it.
00:05:29.439 --> 00:05:30.800
We always want more.
00:05:30.959 --> 00:05:35.759
We think of new things to do to create for each other, to want for ourselves.
00:05:36.000 --> 00:05:38.800
It's like a relative game, Altman said.
00:05:39.519 --> 00:05:41.680
I think he is completely right.
00:05:42.079 --> 00:05:44.800
And I see it every single week in my coaching.
00:05:45.120 --> 00:05:47.680
AI isn't lightening anyone's load.
00:05:47.839 --> 00:05:53.279
It's quietly absorbing the work my clients used to do so they can go do even more work.
00:05:53.759 --> 00:05:57.600
The reports write themselves now, so we run three more analyses.
00:05:57.759 --> 00:06:01.120
The emails draft in seconds, so we send twice as many.
00:06:01.360 --> 00:06:15.759
And don't even get me started on AI anxiety and how that's pushing some of my clients into a frenzy in the precious after-work hours and weekends, which used to be reserved for, you know, relaxation, not vibe coding.
00:06:16.000 --> 00:06:17.920
Good news for us rats in the race.
00:06:18.160 --> 00:06:24.319
The speed setting on our hamster wheel has now been set to 11, so now we can run even faster.
00:06:24.959 --> 00:06:28.399
Here's how you can use this topic in Smalltalk next week.
00:06:28.560 --> 00:06:29.759
With coworkers.
00:06:30.000 --> 00:06:34.879
Did you catch Altman basically saying AI is never getting us to a four-day week?
00:06:35.120 --> 00:06:37.199
Honestly, feels true to me.
00:06:37.439 --> 00:06:41.120
My to-do list only got longer since we started using AI.
00:06:41.439 --> 00:06:45.199
Are you actually saving any time or just doing more?
00:06:45.680 --> 00:06:47.040
With your boss.
00:06:47.439 --> 00:06:54.480
I keep thinking about Altman's point that productivity gains get reinvested into more ambition, not more free time.
00:06:54.720 --> 00:07:02.800
Makes me wonder where we want to deliberately reinvest the hours AI is freeing up on our team before they quietly refill themselves with busy work.
00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:19.360
To learn more, check out my free weekly newsletter for communicating in the Western Workplace, read by over 2,000 Chinese professionals.
00:07:19.600 --> 00:07:22.720
Just search Daily Up Jonathan and you will find me.
00:07:22.959 --> 00:07:24.079
That's all for today.
00:07:24.319 --> 00:07:27.519
See you next Sunday with the Trisong Shao Hua Banan.
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.440
Welcome back to Day Day Up, the weekly podcast for Chinese professionals navigating the Western workplace.
00:00:05.599 --> 00:00:06.320
I'm Jonathan.
00:00:06.480 --> 00:00:07.679
Let's get into it.
00:00:08.320 --> 00:00:10.960
Cho Ruha with a Chuchang Xiaohuban.
00:00:11.279 --> 00:00:12.800
Can you be more concise?
00:00:13.119 --> 00:00:18.399
If you've heard that at work, it means they've already stopped listening a while ago.
00:00:18.640 --> 00:00:21.280
I've won a national speaking competition twice.
00:00:21.440 --> 00:00:30.000
I've presented to CEOs, negotiated with government regulators, and crafted messaging for hundred million dollar ad campaigns.
00:00:30.160 --> 00:00:32.000
And I've still received that feedback.
00:00:32.159 --> 00:00:33.039
I still do.
00:00:33.280 --> 00:00:48.960
After years of communicating in high-stakes situations and still working on my own conciseness, I've learned what being concise actually means, why it's so difficult, and the two phrases I use to get to the point when I have no time to prepare.
00:00:49.280 --> 00:00:56.799
Cambridge Dictionary defines concise as short and clear, expressing what needs to be said without unnecessary words.
00:00:57.039 --> 00:01:05.680
Read it again because there are two jobs hiding in that sentence, deciding what needs to be said, cutting the unnecessary words.
00:01:06.000 --> 00:01:08.640
Almost everyone jumps straight to the second one.
00:01:08.879 --> 00:01:10.480
It's the visible half.
00:01:10.640 --> 00:01:16.079
You can count words, you can time yourself, you can make that paragraph shorter.
00:01:16.400 --> 00:01:19.920
For us Chinese professionals, that pull is even stronger.
00:01:20.159 --> 00:01:28.640
When you work in your second language, a long block of English is just that much harder for you to make it through compared to your coworker.
00:01:28.879 --> 00:01:31.200
Like reading through my newsletter right now.
00:01:31.439 --> 00:01:38.000
I appreciate you, but cutting words without deciding what needs to be said doesn't make you concise.
00:01:38.480 --> 00:01:40.480
It makes you incomplete.
00:01:41.040 --> 00:01:50.079
In my own writing and speaking, I work in a specific order, decide what needs to be said, and then start cutting around that.
00:01:50.480 --> 00:01:52.079
You've heard the advice.
00:01:52.400 --> 00:01:58.239
Great speaking and writing starts with great thinking, which is true and often utterly useless.
00:01:58.560 --> 00:02:01.760
Because great thinking isn't one thing.
00:02:02.079 --> 00:02:05.920
A scientist reads a businessman's idea and finds it simplistic.
00:02:06.159 --> 00:02:09.759
A businessman reads a scientist's idea and finds it overcomplex.
00:02:10.000 --> 00:02:12.560
Both are thinking well, just for different terrain.
00:02:12.879 --> 00:02:16.159
At work, great thinking doesn't start in your head.
00:02:16.319 --> 00:02:17.759
It starts in theirs.
00:02:18.000 --> 00:02:23.439
Because almost everything we say at work is chasing one of two things, alignment or action.
00:02:23.680 --> 00:02:26.319
Both of them happen inside somebody else's head.
00:02:26.479 --> 00:02:32.879
Which means before you can think about your message, you need to understand three things about the other person.
00:02:33.039 --> 00:02:37.520
What's in it for them, what's the one thing they need to know, and what they need to do.
00:02:37.840 --> 00:02:41.439
Let's take an example from my recent client, Bing.
00:02:41.840 --> 00:02:48.800
Her project was tracking two weeks behind schedule, and she needed to communicate that concisely to her busy manager.
00:02:49.280 --> 00:02:50.560
What's in it for me?
00:02:50.800 --> 00:02:54.159
Bing's manager doesn't really care about the specific reasons.
00:02:54.400 --> 00:02:55.520
Not right now.
00:02:56.159 --> 00:03:01.120
Right now, he cares about a launch date he promised his own boss.
00:03:01.599 --> 00:03:02.960
What's the one thing?
00:03:03.280 --> 00:03:03.919
Naturally.
00:03:04.080 --> 00:03:07.039
The one thing Bing needs to share isn't everything that happened.
00:03:07.199 --> 00:03:09.439
It's that the launch date is now at risk.
00:03:09.680 --> 00:03:14.560
The cause can follow in one short line, but it never goes first.
00:03:15.199 --> 00:03:16.479
What do I need to do?
00:03:16.719 --> 00:03:17.919
Bing's recommendation.
00:03:18.080 --> 00:03:21.199
Keep the date and drop one feature or move the date.
00:03:21.439 --> 00:03:25.439
Together, these three are the first half of the concise formula.
00:03:25.759 --> 00:03:27.280
What needs to be said?
00:03:28.000 --> 00:03:31.199
Now the second half, cutting the unnecessary words.
00:03:31.520 --> 00:03:34.400
If you grew up Chinese, you learned putien.
00:03:34.800 --> 00:03:36.719
Context first, conclusion last.
00:03:36.960 --> 00:03:43.919
So you pile on the context at the beginning, hoping more information will show your thoughtfulness and your rigor.
00:03:44.159 --> 00:03:49.439
In fact, for your audience, it's confusing at best and downright frustrating at worst.
00:03:49.680 --> 00:03:52.400
So I clamp both ends of the message.
00:03:52.719 --> 00:04:01.840
Open with the main thing is close with the reason I'm telling you is try to finish either sentence without having decided something.
00:04:02.080 --> 00:04:02.960
You can't.
00:04:03.120 --> 00:04:05.360
The first one won't let you open with context.
00:04:05.520 --> 00:04:07.759
So it forces your main message to the front.
00:04:07.919 --> 00:04:10.240
The second one won't let you end on information.
00:04:10.400 --> 00:04:12.479
So it forces your ask.
00:04:13.039 --> 00:04:14.719
Here's what it looks like for Bing.
00:04:15.199 --> 00:04:16.079
Before.
00:04:16.399 --> 00:04:24.399
So we had the vendor issue in week two, and then the data migration took longer than expected because the schema didn't match what they gave us.
00:04:24.480 --> 00:04:33.439
And QA found a few things, and I've been working through it with the team, and I think we're mostly okay, but the timeline might move a bit.
00:04:33.680 --> 00:04:34.319
After.
00:04:34.560 --> 00:04:38.399
The main thing is we're two weeks behind and the launch date is at risk.
00:04:38.560 --> 00:04:41.120
The cause was the vendor delay in week two.
00:04:41.279 --> 00:04:48.879
The reason I'm telling you is that I'd like your input on whether we hold the date and cut the reporting feature or move the date.
00:04:49.439 --> 00:04:54.560
I hope that in as few words as possible, I've conveyed my own main message here.
00:04:55.040 --> 00:04:59.839
Conciseness isn't a writing skill, it's a decision-making skill.
00:05:00.079 --> 00:05:03.680
Become more concise, and you'll become so much more.
00:05:04.959 --> 00:05:07.360
Alright, that's your growth tip for this week.
00:05:07.519 --> 00:05:09.439
Now let's take a melon break.
00:05:12.319 --> 00:05:15.920
Sam Altman, you're going to work harder and you're going to love it.
00:05:16.240 --> 00:05:20.959
Sam Altman got on a podcast this week and admitted something refreshingly honest.
00:05:21.279 --> 00:05:24.959
AI is not going to give you a four-day work week.
00:05:25.199 --> 00:05:29.199
Not because the tech can't handle it, but because we won't let it.
00:05:29.439 --> 00:05:30.800
We always want more.
00:05:30.959 --> 00:05:35.759
We think of new things to do to create for each other, to want for ourselves.
00:05:36.000 --> 00:05:38.800
It's like a relative game, Altman said.
00:05:39.519 --> 00:05:41.680
I think he is completely right.
00:05:42.079 --> 00:05:44.800
And I see it every single week in my coaching.
00:05:45.120 --> 00:05:47.680
AI isn't lightening anyone's load.
00:05:47.839 --> 00:05:53.279
It's quietly absorbing the work my clients used to do so they can go do even more work.
00:05:53.759 --> 00:05:57.600
The reports write themselves now, so we run three more analyses.
00:05:57.759 --> 00:06:01.120
The emails draft in seconds, so we send twice as many.
00:06:01.360 --> 00:06:15.759
And don't even get me started on AI anxiety and how that's pushing some of my clients into a frenzy in the precious after-work hours and weekends, which used to be reserved for, you know, relaxation, not vibe coding.
00:06:16.000 --> 00:06:17.920
Good news for us rats in the race.
00:06:18.160 --> 00:06:24.319
The speed setting on our hamster wheel has now been set to 11, so now we can run even faster.
00:06:24.959 --> 00:06:28.399
Here's how you can use this topic in Smalltalk next week.
00:06:28.560 --> 00:06:29.759
With coworkers.
00:06:30.000 --> 00:06:34.879
Did you catch Altman basically saying AI is never getting us to a four-day week?
00:06:35.120 --> 00:06:37.199
Honestly, feels true to me.
00:06:37.439 --> 00:06:41.120
My to-do list only got longer since we started using AI.
00:06:41.439 --> 00:06:45.199
Are you actually saving any time or just doing more?
00:06:45.680 --> 00:06:47.040
With your boss.
00:06:47.439 --> 00:06:54.480
I keep thinking about Altman's point that productivity gains get reinvested into more ambition, not more free time.
00:06:54.720 --> 00:07:02.800
Makes me wonder where we want to deliberately reinvest the hours AI is freeing up on our team before they quietly refill themselves with busy work.
00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:19.360
To learn more, check out my free weekly newsletter for communicating in the Western Workplace, read by over 2,000 Chinese professionals.
00:07:19.600 --> 00:07:22.720
Just search Daily Up Jonathan and you will find me.
00:07:22.959 --> 00:07:24.079
That's all for today.
00:07:24.319 --> 00:07:27.519
See you next Sunday with the Trisong Shao Hua Banan.
